[1]陈奎庆,于小进.社会学习抑或社会交换:包容型领导对员工建言的影响机制探究[J].常州大学学报(社会科学版),2018,19(04):41-54.[doi:10.3969/j.issn.2095-042X.2018.04.005]
　Chen Kuiqing,Yu Xiaojin.Social Learning or Social Exchange: Exploring the Influencing Mechanism of Inclusive Leadership on Employee Voice[J].Journal of Changzhou University(Social Science Edition),2018,19(04):41-54.[doi:10.3969/j.issn.2095-042X.2018.04.005]
点击复制

社会学习抑或社会交换:包容型领导对员工建言的影响机制探究()
分享到：

常州大学学报(社会科学版)[ISSN:2095-042X/CN:32-1821/C]

卷:
第19卷
期数:
2018年04期
页码:
41-54
栏目:
经济·管理学研究
出版日期:
2018-07-28

文章信息/Info

Title:
Social Learning or Social Exchange: Exploring the Influencing Mechanism of Inclusive Leadership on Employee Voice
作者:
陈奎庆; 于小进
Author(s):
Chen Kuiqing; Yu Xiaojin
关键词:
包容型领导;  建言行为;  领导-成员交换;  建言效能感
Keywords:
inclusive leadership;  voice behavior;  leader-member exchange;  voice efficacy
分类号:
C933.1
DOI:
10.3969/j.issn.2095-042X.2018.04.005
文献标志码:
A
摘要:
整合社会交换和社会学习理论,基于270份高科技企业领导与员工的配对问卷调查,考察了包容型领导对员工促进性建言与抑制性建言行为的影响机理,并比较分析了领导-成员交换和建言效能感的双重中介作用。实证分析结果发现:领导-成员交换和建言效能感在包容型领导影响员工建言行为的过程中均发挥中介作用; 建言效能感在包容型领导对员工促进性建言行为的影响中发挥的中介效应显著强于领导-成员交换; 领导-成员交换在包容型领导对员工抑制性建言行为的影响中发挥的中介效应显著强于建言效能感。研究结论表明,虽然社会交换和社会学习理论都能解释包容型领导对员工建言行为的作用机制; 但对不同类型的建言行为,两种理论的解释力有所差异。
Abstract:
Integrating the theories of social exchange and social learning, the influencing mechanism of inclusive leadership on employees’ promotive and prohibitive voice behaviors is analyzed based on 270 paired questionnaires between hi-tech enterprise leaders and their employees and the dual mediating effects of leader-member exchange and voice efficacy are compared. The empirical study demonstrates that both leader-member exchange and voice efficacy mediate during the process of inclusive leadership influencing employee voice behavior; the mediating effects of voice efficacy are obviously stronger than those of leader-member exchange in the aspect of promotive voice behavior; the mediating effects of leader-member exchange are obviously stronger than those of voice efficacy in the aspect of prohibitive voice behavior. The results suggest that both social exchange and social learning theories can explain the underlying mechanisms of inclusive leadership on employee voice behavior, but the explanatory power of the two theories is different in terms of different types of voice behavior.

参考文献/References:


[1]ZHANG Y, HUAI M Y, XIE Y H. Paternalistic leadership and employee voice in China: a dual process model[J]. Leadership quarterly, 2015, 26(1):25-36.
[2]王永跃, 段锦云.政治技能如何影响员工建言: 关系及绩效的作用[J]. 管理世界, 2015(3):102-112.
[3]LI Y, SUN J M. Traditional Chinese leadership and employee voice behavior: a cross-level examination[J]. Leadership quarterly, 2015, 26(2):172-189.
[4]YANG Q, LIU M X. Ethical leadership, organizational identification and employee voice: examining moderated mediation process in the Chinese insurance industry[J]. Asia pacific business review, 2014, 20(2):231-248.
[5]梁建.道德领导与员工建言: 一个调节——中介模型的构建与检验[J]. 心理学报, 2014, 46(2):252-264.
[6]张丽华, 郭云贵, 刘睿. 中国情境下的领导行为与员工建言[J]. 首都经济贸易大学学报, 2017, 19(2):81-87.
[7]朱瑜, 钱姝婷. 包容型领导研究前沿探析与未来展望[J]. 外国经济与管理, 2014, 36(2):55-64.
[8]李锐, 凌文辁, 方俐洛. 上司支持感知对下属建言行为的影响及其作用机制[J]. 中国软科学, 2010(4):106-115.
[9]石冠峰, 梁鹏. 中国情境下包容型领导风格如何影响员工建言行为[J]. 领导科学, 2015(29):51-54.
[10]杨梦园, 赵强. 包容型领导对员工建言的影响:建言效能感和内部动机的中介作用[J]. 领导科学, 2016(14):33-34.
[11]HSIUNG H H. Authentic leadership and employee voice behavior: a multi-level psychological process[J]. Journal of business ethics, 2012, 107(3):349-361.
[12]CHEN S Y, HOU Y H. The effects of ethical leadership, voice behavior and climates for innovation on creativity: a moderated mediation examination[J]. Leadership quarterly, 2016, 27(1):1-13.
[13]段锦云, 黄彩云. 变革型领导对员工建言的影响机制再探:自我决定的视角[J]. 南开管理评论, 2014, 17(4):98-109.
[14]CROPANZANO R, MITCHELL M S. Social exchange theory: an interdisciplinary review[J]. Journal of management, 2005, 31(6):874-900.
[15]段锦云,魏秋江.建言效能感结构及其在员工建言行为发生中的作用[J]. 心理学报, 2012, 44(7):972-985.
[16]LIANG J, FARH C I C, FARH J L. Psychological antecedents of promotive and prohibitive voice: a two-wave examination[J]. Academy of management journal, 2012, 55(1):71-92.
[17]LIN S H J, JOHNSONO R E. A suggestion to improve a day keeps your depletion away: examining promotive and prohibitive voice behaviors within a regulatory focus and ego depletion framework[J]. Journal of applied psychology, 2015,100(5):1381-1397.
[18]NEMBHARD I M, EDMONDSON A C. Making it safe: the effects of leader inclusiveness and professional status on psychological safety and improvement efforts in health care teams[J]. Journal of organizational behavior, 2006, 27(7):941-966.
[19]CARMELII A, REITER-PALMON R, ZIV E. Inclusive leadership and employee involvement in creative tasks in the workplace: the mediating role of psychological safety[J]. Creativity research journal, 2010, 22(3):250-260.
[20]LEPINE J A, VAN DYNE L. Predicting voice behavior in work groups[J]. Journal of applied psychology, 1998, 83(6):853-868.
[21]HIRAK R, PENG A C, CARMELI A, et al. Linking leader inclusiveness to work unit performance: the importance of psychological safety and learning from failures[J]. Leadership quarterly, 2012, 23(1):107-117.
[22]刘燕, 李锐, 赵曙明. 包容性领导与下属揭发意愿的关系:一个被调节的中介效应模型[J]. 心理科学, 2016, 39(1):144-150.
[23]罗瑾琏, 赵佳. 真实型领导对员工建言行为的影响机理研究[J]. 软科学, 2013, 27(12):41-44.
[24]GRAEN G B, UHL-BIEN M. Relationship-based approach to leadership: development of leader-member exchange(LMX)theory of leadership over 25 years: applying a multi-level multi-domain perspective[J]. The leadership quarterly, 1995, 6(2):219-247.
[25]LIDEN R C, SPARROWE R T, WAYNE S J. Leader-member exchange theory: the past and potential for the future[J]. Research in personnel and human resources management, 1997, 15(1):47-120.
[26]CHOI S B, TRAN T B H, PARK B I. Inclusive leadership and work engagement: mediating roles of affective organizational commitment and creativity[J]. Social behavior and personality an international journal, 2015, 43(6):931-944.
[27]朱玥, 王晓辰. 服务型领导对员工建言行为的影响:领导-成员交换和学习目标取向的作用[J]. 心理科学, 2015, 38(2):426-432.
[28]DULEBOHN J H, BOMMER W H, LIDEN R C, et al. A meta-analysis of antecedents and consequences of leader-member exchange integrating the past with an eye toward the future[J]. Journal of management, 2012,38(6):1715-1759.
[29]BOWLER W M, HALBESKEBEN J R B, PAUL J R B. If you’re close with the leader, you must be a brownnose: the role of leader-member relationships in follower,leader, and coworker attributions of organizational citizenship behavior motives[J]. Human resource management review, 2010, 20(4):309-316.
[30]刘生敏,廖建桥.中国员工真能被 “领” 开言路吗: 真实型领导对员工抑制性建言的影响[J]. 商业经济与管理, 2015, 284(6):58-68.
[31]KISH-GEPHART J J, DETERT J R, TREVINO L K, et al. Silenced by fear: the nature, sources, and consequences of fear at work[J]. Research in organizational behavior, 2009, 29(1):163-193.
[32]BANDURA A. Self-efficacy: the exercise of control[M]. New York: W H Freeman, 1997.
[33]谢俊,储小平,钟雨文.变革型领导与员工建言: 建言效能感和领导组织代表性的影响[J]. 中大管理研究, 2015, 10(2):1-18.
[34]马跃如,程伟波,周娟美.心理所有权和犬儒主义在包容性领导对员工离职倾向影响中的中介作用[J]. 中南大学学报(社会科学版), 2014, 20(3):6-12.
[35]WEI X, ZHANG Z X, CHEN X P. I will speak up if my voice is socially desirable: a moderated mediating process of promotive versus prohibitive voice[J]. Journal of applied psychology, 2015, 100(5):1641-1652.
[36]ILIES R, NAHRGANG J D, MORGESON F P. Leader-member exchange and citizenship behaviors: a meta-analysis[J]. Journal of applied psychology, 2007, 92(1):269-277.
[37]LALWANI A K, SHRUM L J, CHIU C. Motivated response styles: the role of cultural values, regulatory focus, and self-consciousness in socially desirable responding[J]. Journal of personality and social psychology, 2009, 96(4):870-882.
[38]BURRIS E R. The risks and rewards of speaking up: managerial responses to employee voice[J]. Academy of management journal, 2012, 55(4):851-875.
[39]魏昕, 张志学. 组织中为什么缺乏抑制性进言?[J]. 管理世界, 2010(10):99-109.
[40]EDMONDSON A C. Speaking up in the operating room: how team leaders promote learning in interdisciplinary action teams[J]. Journal of management studies, 2003, 40(6):1419-1452.
[41]王辉,牛雄鹰,罗胜强.领导部属交换的多维度结构及其对工作绩效和情景绩效的影响[J]. 心理学报, 2004, 36(2):179-185.
[42]PODSAKOFF P M, MACKENZIE S B, LEE J Y, et al. Common method biases in behavioral research[J]. Journal of applied psychology, 2003, 88(5):879-903.
[43]FORNELL C, LARCKER D F. Evaluating structural equation models with unobservable variables and measurement error[J]. Journal of marketing research, 1981, 18(1):39-50.
[44]BARON R M, KENNY D A. The moderator-mediator variable distinction in social psychological research: conceptual, strategic and statistical considerations[J]. Journal of personality and social psychology, 1986, 51(6):1173-1182.
[45]PREACHER K J, HAYES A F. Asymptotic and re-sampling strategies for assessing and comparing indirect effects in multiple mediator models[J]. Behavior research methods, 2008, 40(3):879-891.
[46]WANG D, GAN C, WU C, et al. Ethical leadership and employee voice: employee self-efficacy and self-impact as mediators[J]. Psychological reports, 2015, 116(3):751-767.

相似文献/References:

[1]李群,蔡芙蓉.包容型领导对制造业新生代农民工创新行为的影响——社会交换理论和社会认知理论的双重视角[J].常州大学学报(社会科学版),2020,21(05):62.[doi:10.3969/j.issn.2095-042X.2020.05.007]
　Li Qun,Cai Furong.The Influence of Inclusive Leadership on the Innovation Behaviors of New-generation Migrant Workers in Manufacturing: From the Double Perspectives of Social Exchange Theory and Social Cognitive Theory[J].Journal of Changzhou University(Social Science Edition),2020,21(04):62.[doi:10.3969/j.issn.2095-042X.2020.05.007]

备注/Memo

备注/Memo:
作者简介:陈奎庆,常州大学商学院研究员、硕士生导师; 于小进,常州大学商学院硕士研究生。
基金项目:教育部人文社会科学研究一般项目“中国组织情境下创业型领导研究:结构、测量及其对新创企业成长的作用机制”(14YJA630003)。
更新日期/Last Update: 2018-07-28